Who's The Best in Chicago?

My friends, business partners and I are enthusiastic foodies/home cooks/omnivores, and we always end up talking about what's new in Chicago this week, where we went last week, etc. We host potluck parties and pig out (literally and figuratively), talking about all the different components of what makes up a "local chef" and a "celebrity chef" these days.

Think about it: it takes a lot more than a wicked dish and a packed house every night to make a food/TV/book/media superstar. There's relatability to consider, maybe some baser "looks" evaluation that no one likes to admit (but exists nonetheless). Timing, personality, local and national fanbase, a vibrant economy to support your enterprise . . . the list goes on.

Add to that the fact the market is swarming with food shows and in danger of dying off - not of obsolescence but of a cultural anorexia.

So I'd like to hear what you guys think, seeing as how we contribute so much chef and restaurant-wise to the national food scene. Who's your favorite Chicago chef to get the nod for that kind of vaulted treatment? There are some obvious choices, but I'd like to hear what comes back without tampering with the survey.

A "celebrity chef" is somebody your non-foodie grandmother has heard of.

DOLAN wrote:Who's your favorite Chicago chef to get the nod for that kind of vaulted treatment?

I'm not sure what you're asking. Who has the best reputation nationwide? Who has had the most media exposure? Who is the biggest celebrity? Who is the best chef with a national reputation? Who has had the most influence on the national restaurant industry? Very confusing.

BTW, I think you mean vaunted treatment...

nsxtasy wrote:

DOLAN wrote:Who's your favorite Chicago chef to get the nod for that kind of vaulted treatment?

I'm not sure what you're asking. Who has the best reputation nationwide? Who has had the most media exposure? Who is the biggest celebrity? Who is the best chef with a national reputation? Who has had the most influence on the national restaurant industry? Very confusing.

BTW, I think you mean vaunted treatment...

You gave a heck of a lot of categories but no answer. And by "vaulted", I literally meant being elevated to national status with all of the pieces of the machine in place.

This is a simple and personal question: who deserves it but doesn't have it, and who's got the best range of those necessary talents? Who's your favorite that you would like to see get the vaunted/vaulted treatment?

A Paul Kahan answer, for example, would best be supported by reasons why you defend him as your pick. Have you been going to the same neighborhood place for years and thought it deserved more spotlight? That its chef was fun and friendly and amazing? We all have our own picks, for sure. I'd just like to hear some more.

There is no perfect answer, because there's way too many options.

LAZ wrote:A "celebrity chef" is somebody your non-foodie grandmother has heard of.

That's a true statement. (Or would be if they weren't passed.)

In the wake of Guy Fieri's meteoric rise to the middle, our discussions are based on who we think has the goods food/style-wise and who would wear the mantle well.

If that helps.

Um...

DOLAN wrote:

nsxtasy wrote:

DOLAN wrote:Who's your favorite Chicago chef to get the nod for that kind of vaulted treatment?

BTW, I think you mean vaunted treatment...

by "vaulted", I literally meant being elevated to national status with all of the pieces of the machine in place.

Don't worry; it's a common error for people to confuse these two words with each other. To set the record straight, let's look at what the dictionary gives as the only definitions for these words when used as an adjective, such as in the post above.

Per m-w.com, vaulted = "built in the form of a vault; arched" or "covered with a vault".

Per m-w.com, vaunted = "highly or widely praised or boasted about".

Rather than get involved in the semantic discussion, I'll go ahead and say that I disagree with the underlying premise that there's some conspiratorial media machine that somehow decides on and then annoints a certain chef to be catapulted to national notoriety.

Chefs that attain national 'celebrity chef' status generally do so over a long, long period involving a ton of hard work running restaurants, writing books, doing tv and personal appearances, and all sorts of other stuff. It doesn't just "happen".

I think the OP has watched one too many reality shows and has gotten locked in to that kind of thinking, but is now trying to apply it to the real world. Doesn't usually work that way.

DOLAN wrote:You gave a heck of a lot of categories but no answer. And by "vaulted", I literally meant being elevated to national status with all of the pieces of the machine in place.

This is a simple and personal question: who deserves it but doesn't have it, and who's got the best range of those necessary talents? Who's your favorite that you would like to see get the vaunted/vaulted treatment?

A Paul Kahan answer, for example, would best be supported by reasons why you defend him as your pick. Have you been going to the same neighborhood place for years and thought it deserved more spotlight? That its chef was fun and friendly and amazing? We all have our own picks, for sure. I'd just like to hear some more.

There is no perfect answer, because there's way too many options.

Why not get the ball rolling by answering the question yourself first? It might feel like less of a pop quiz that way.

nsxtasy wrote:Per m-w.com, vaunted = "highly or widely praised or boasted about".

Do you still think you mean "vaulted" rather than "vaunted"? And if so, what kind of vault are you referring to, a vault (arch) in a ceiling, or a vault (safe place) for keeping valuables?

I'll assume you intentionally left out the fact that your source also has an interpretation of "vault" the way the OP used. If you beleive that since the op used the word "vaulted" so it can only have the m-w meanings for the word vaulted, and not other variations, then your cards are on the table for all to see.

Pole Vault: a vault with the aid of a pole; specifically : a field event consisting of a vault for height over a crossbar.

I'm gonna assume that you were just busting stones.

elakin wrote:I disagree with the underlying premise that there's some conspiratorial media machine that somehow decides on and then annoints a certain chef to be catapulted to national notoriety.

You mean there's no TV show called "Top Chef"?

seebee wrote:

(reply deleted)

nsxtasy wrote:However, you make a good point - that any of us can use whatever words we like, and they can mean whatever we want them to mean, even if nobody else uses them that way. Gotcha. Klaatu barada nikto!

I agree. The way I see it, whatever embiggens you is totally cromulent with me.

So far, I'm loving this thread. 12 replies so far and not one answer. Instead we're debating about some semantic nuance.

I have an answer.

42

That is all.

nsxtasy wrote:

elakin wrote:(Even though it's clear from the OP's context that he/she actually meant to use the word "vaunted", but doesn't realize the difference between the two words.)

I don't think they meant to use "vaunted" at all. I also think they know the difference between the two words. They were not using the meanings of the words in your examples, but m-w has other meanings for the word vault. They were using the other meaning that m-w has. The one you left out. I'm not sure if you are referring to "vault" as a word that someone can use that can have a meaning that nobody else uses. M-w uses "vault" the same way the op used.

Cogito wrote:So far, I'm loving this thread. 12 replies so far and not one answer. Instead we're debating about some semantic nuance.

Lol - I'd provide an answer, but I simply don't care. The premise seems like something my pointy haired boss would bring up. My co-workers would then quickly provide the answers that the bossperson would want to hear, so we could get back to work on our meaningful projects knowing fully that the bossperson's attention span would quickly turn to something else in a matter of days, and the fruitless discussion would end without even a trace of it ever existing. IMO, the question posed reeks of a 60 yr old Vice Pres of a giant company trying to look good. I'd devote time to an answer if I had some chronic and it was 80 degrees out, but frankly, I'm gonna devote my limited brainpower to this re-run of Family Guy right now.

seebee wrote:

nsxtasy wrote:

elakin wrote:(Even though it's clear from the OP's context that he/she actually meant to use the word "vaunted", but doesn't realize the difference between the two words.)

I don't think they meant to use "vaunted" at all. I also think they know the difference between the two words. They were not using the meanings of the words in your examples, but m-w has other meanings for the word vault. They were using the other meaning that m-w has. The one you left out. I'm not sure if you are referring to "vault" as a word that someone can use that can have a meaning that nobody else uses. M-w uses "vault" the same way the op used.

Or maybe you're both right:

(reply deleted)

jesteinf wrote:I have an answer.

42

That is all.

Semantics aside, I have to agree with Ken that the original premise was, at best, ill-defined. Which is why I can vehemently disagree with jesteinf. If he knew anything at all, he'd realize the ultimate and only answer is ghiulimbt dueavly.

nsxtasy wrote:

seebee wrote:They were not using the meanings of the words in your examples, but m-w has other meanings for the word vault.

Nope. You're talking about the other definition of the word used as an action verb, whereas it was clearly used in the opening post as an adjective with absolutely no relationship to the action the verb represents.

This is why I hate LTH - people who argue nastily and endlessly over and over and over and over, taking things WAY too seriously in replying to posts made with obvious humorous intent. Really, don't you think it's time for us to move on, and talk about how silly the original query was instead? I'll be happy to stop posting about semantics in this topic if you will. Let's try it!

Actually, the seebee's explanation pretty much jives with the way I always understood people to use the term "vaulted." Your argument doesn't pass mustard.

DOLAN wrote:but I'd like to hear what comes back without tampering with the survey.

My moderator trigger finger itched when I read the original post, first time poster asking a PR type question that few, if any, LTHers give a scratch about, I thought it'd get silly fast, but 20-posts on word usage, come on. Some of the best, most interesting posts on LTHForm contain misspellings, improper word usage and punctuation errors. Mine included, plus I tend to use commas as if they were on sale.

Jesteinf has the correct answer, 42, and my pick for "Chicago chef to get the nod for vaulted treatment" is Juan Zaragoza.

Enjoy,
Gary

nsxtasy wrote:

seebee wrote:They were not using the meanings of the words in your examples, but m-w has other meanings for the word vault.

Nope. You're talking about the other definition of the word used as an action verb, whereas it was clearly used in the opening post as an adjective with absolutely no relationship to the action the verb represents.

This is why I hate LTH - people who argue nastily and endlessly over and over and over and over, taking things WAY too seriously in replying to posts made with obvious humorous intent. Really, don't you think it's time for us to move on, and talk about how silly the original query was instead? I'll be happy to stop posting about semantics in this topic if you will. Let's try it!

Nsxtasy, I hope you really don't think I'm arguing nastily. I don't really think you do, but I'd just like to make sure of it. I'd be happy to stop arguing as soon as you admit you're wrong.
No, for real tho, the op did not MEAN to use the word vaunted. He/She clearly explained that they did not mean to use the word vaunted. They meant to, and wanted to use the word "vaulted." Whether they used it correctly or not is apparently moot. They MEANT to use the word vaulted tho.

Personally, I love LTH for these threads for a tangent on the reason you hate lth. When someone poses a question such as this, the responses tend to meander towards more interesting topics to (I think) indirectly show a little contempt towards the question posed. I think this thread is hilarious.

nsxtasy wrote:This is why I hate LTH - people who argue nastily and endlessly over and over and over and over, taking things WAY too seriously in replying to posts made with obvious humorous intent.

For someone who hates LTH, you certainly post a lot.

nr706 wrote:Which is why I can vehemently disagree with jesteinf. If he knew anything at all, he'd realize the ultimate and only answer is ghiulimbt dueavly.

See, this is why I hate LTH...

jesteinf wrote:I have an answer.

42

That is all.

I think by now I'd prefer 86.

JeffB wrote:Your argument doesn't pass mustard.

JeffB wins the thread!

My vote goes to Doug Sohn, owner of Hot Doug's.

kl1191 wrote:

JeffB wrote:Your argument doesn't pass mustard.

JeffB wins the thread!

Thanks. The jive-jibe mistake is more pestiferous, but a win's a win. And to be clear, I did mean to use both of those words -- just not the way you think I thought I meant to use them.